on the
Doctrine of Discovery
May 8, 2012
“The Doctrine of Christian Discovery is factually, illegally
and morally wrong.”
“We call upon the United Nations to declare that the
Doctrine of Discovery is illegal and cannot be relied upon by state governments
and law making for policy development or in litigation.”
###
The North American Indigenous Peoples’ Caucus Statement
11th
Session of the
UN
Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, United Nations Headquarters, New York
Delivered
by Steven Newcomb (Shawnee/Lenape), Indigenous Law Institute
May 8,
2012
Agenda Item 3: Discussion on the
special theme for the year: “The Doctrine of Discovery: its enduring impact on
indigenous peoples and the right to redress for past conquests (Articles 28 and
37 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples).”
Thank you Mr. Chairman,
Because this is the first time the North American Caucus has
taken the floor, we want to commend Grand Chief Ed John for his election as
Chairman of the 11th Session of the UN Permanent Forum.
The North American Caucus recommends the United Nations
confirm that the doctrine of Christian discovery is factually, legally, and
morally wrong. This is partly based on the fourth paragraph in the preamble of
the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which states “that all
doctrines, policies and practices based on or advocating superiority of peoples
or individuals on the basis of national origin or racial, religious, ethnic or
cultural differences are racist, scientifically false, legally invalid, morally
condemnable and socially unjust.”
The North American Caucus calls upon the United Nations to
declare that the doctrine of discovery is illegal and cannot be relied upon by
state governments in law making, policy development or in litigation.
The North American Caucus recommends that the Permanent Forum
safeguard and promote Indigenous Peoples’ sovereignty in the European derived
legal frameworks in its work on the Discovery doctrine.
The North American Caucus recommends the Permanent Forum
should be encouraged in cooperation with state governments to undertake a
complete and comprehensive study on the effects of the doctrine of discovery on
the lands and territories of Indigenous Nations and Peoples,
The North American Caucus recommends that the UNPFII conduct
a comprehensive study of the use of the Doctrine of Discovery by states as an
underlying basis for state policies, practices, and laws, a study convened to
discuss in detail the findings and global implications of the preliminary study
of the Doctrine of Discovery and to present its findings to the Permanent Forum
on Indigenous Issues at its annual session.
Mr. Chairman the North American Caucus
recommends that Indigenous Peoples push forward to take this framework of
analysis to the next level and encourage an expert group meeting to examine the
effects of domination on Indigenous Peoples.
The North American Caucus recommends
that a comprehensive panel of legalists and jurists be assembled to review all
the actions under the doctrine of discovery and domination such as the
residential schools and the Indian Act in Canada.
The North American Caucus recommends that the UNPFII urge
States to repeal laws, policies and processes based on the Doctrine of
Discovery.
We recommend that the Intergenerational impacts of the
Doctrine of Discovery on Indigenous children be taught in schools and that
there needs to be educational opportunities to be informed of the Doctrine of
Discovery so that young people have an opportunity to resist and refute the
doctrine.
We call upon the UNPFII to recommend that the appropriate UN
body embark on an educational campaign on the Doctrine of Discovery.
Mr. Chairman,
the U.S. Supreme Court ruling Johnson
v. M’Intosh referred to the “extravagant…pretension
of converting the discovery of an inhabited country into conquest,” thereby
claiming on the basis of that pretension underlying title to Indigenous lands
and territories. We absolutely reject the idea that Indigenous Nations and
Peoples are conquered. For this reason, we recommend that the term ”conquest”
not be used by the UNPFII in a manner that suggests or implies that conquest
has in fact occurred and that Indigenous Nations and Peoples have been
conquered.
Mr. Chairman, the original free and independent existence of
each and every one of our nations and peoples, and our cultural and spiritual
relationship with our territories, long predates any assertions or claims of a
right of discovery and domination by the monarchies and nations of Western
Christendom during the fifteenth and later centuries. Our original free
existence is the source of the sacred birthright bequeathed to us by our
ancestors, traced to the beginning of time.
Our sacred relationship with Mother Earth and the Sacred
Laws of each of our nations and peoples is the basis for our declaration that
we shall forever be rightfully free of any and all assertions or claims of
dominance by states that trace their political heritage to a long succession of
empires from Europe.
The following quote from the Inter Caetera papal bull of
1493 unequivocally expresses this structure of domination and subordination: “sub dominio actuali temporali aliquorum dominorum
Christianorum constitute non sinct…” and
refers to lands that had at no time been “under the actual temporal domination
of any Christian dominator.”
Evidence of this connection in the Canadian context is found
in the ruling The Delgamuukw v. British Columbia (also known as The Delgamuukw
v. The Queen) (1997) 3 S.C.R. 1010, which is
regarded as the leading decision of the Supreme Court of Canada where the Court
made its most definitive statement on the nature of aboriginal title in the
context of the “assertion of British sovereignty,” and “the assertion of Crown
sovereignty.”
During the CERD Periodic Review 2012 the CERD asked the
government of Canada “What is the legal foundation relied on by the state of
Canada to justify their claim to the underlying title to the lands and
territories of the Indigenous Nations?” Our research reveals that Canada’s
assertion of sovereignty and Crown title is based upon the Doctrine of
Christian Discovery and Domination which is implemented through a policy
negotiation framework and the Comprehensive Claims and Self-Government
policies, with the objective of extinguishing aboriginal rights.
The pretentious claims laid by states—such as the United
Kingdom, Canada, and the United States—to our lands and territories are traced
back to self-acknowledged pretentions to create rights of sovereignty in our
traditional territories through symbolic and ritualized acts (see Arthur S.
Keller, “Creation of Rights of Sovereignty Through Symbolic Acts 1400-1800,”
1939), which are sometimes falsely termed “past conquests.”
Mr. Chairman, the documents of domination that we have
deeply examined in Latin and English—such as documents issued by the Holy See
and the royal crown charters of England and Great Britain--contain an
underlying structure of domination and subordination that exists to this day
and results in current, persistent, and lethal effects of domination on our
nations and peoples. The pope gave Christian monarchs that authorization “imperii Christiani propagationem..” so as “to propagate the Christian empire.” The English
Crown followed this model by promulgating its own royal crown charters of
discovery and domination relative to non-Christian lands.
Mr. Chairman, it was such language in many Church-State and
State-Church documents that supposedly authorized monarchs of Christendom “to
dominate” (‘deprimantur’ in Latin) non-Christian nations and peoples throughout the
globe. Over more than five centuries this language system of domination and
subordination has destructively impacted nations and peoples in Africa, Asia, Oceana
and the Pacific Rim, South, Central, and South America, and Northern Europe,
and particular in our region of Mother Earth, North America. It is this ongoing
and dehumanizing tradition of domination and subordination that caused our
nations and peoples to enter the international arena in 1977, which resulting
in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Thank you.
